I know I'm probably gonna get sh-t for this, but ever since watching the Warriors get murdered by the Lakers I think I will speak my mind.

Monta Ellis needs to involve his teammates more! Monta's a great player don't get me wrong and he played well against the Lakers, but he is a "me first" player. Yes, he had his career high in assists against the Grizzles (he should be distributing the ball like that every game), but his assist average is 4 per game. Not good enough for a point position.

There's been many times that Monta would drive to the hoop with a three on two and take it himself when he should of passed it. He makes the shot yes, but he should have passed the ball so his teammate could score. You're asking yourself, "why should he have passed the ball; he scored anyway?" He should have passed the ball to get his teammates involved with the game and to get his teammates confidence up. A good point guard relies on his teammates to carry a heavy scoring load, but Monta does not rely on his teammates, he relies on himself.

I think if Monta would distribute the ball more while BD is out of the line-up we would play more fluently. J-Rich and Harrington had bad games against the Lakers, but if Monta passed them the ball when they were open then maybe, and I'm saying maybe, J-Rich or Harrington might have gotten into a flow offensively. I saw a couple wide open looks for J-Rich and Harrington in that game (mostly cutting to the hoop), but Monta took it in himself for a harder shot. He either got fouled or made the shot most of the time, but by distributing the ball to your teammates when they're open shows that you have confidence in your team and it gets your teammate going. It didn't really seem like Monta had confidence in anyone that game. Having trust in your teammates is big for a point guard!

One of many Warrior problems is ball distribution. When the Warriors play well they move the ball well and play as a team. When the Warriors struggle they start playing the isolation game, which we can't do! Only Biedrins can possibly isolate well. Monta scored 22 points against the Lakers, but it didn't do sh-t! If he passed the ball more and got about 16 points and 8 assists that game maybe someone else on the team would have played better because they got more looks. Monta could have easily gotten at least four more assists that game because there were players cutting to the hoop or were wide open for a shot and Monta did not pass the ball to them. The key to winning a game is getting your scorers enough touches when they are open, which BD does well, but Monta on the other hand does not do well.

Josh Jamison wrote:I know I'm probably gonna get sh-t for this, but ever since watching the Warriors get murdered by the Lakers I think I will speak my mind.

Monta Ellis needs to involve his teammates more! Monta's a great player don't get me wrong, but he is a "me first" player. Yes, he had his career high in assists against the Grizzles (he should be distributing the ball like that every game), but his assist average is 4 per game. Not good enough for a point position.

There's been many times that Monta would drive to the hoop with a three on two and take it himself when he should of passed it. He makes the shot yes, but he should have passed the ball so his teammate could score. You're asking yourself, "why should he have passed the ball; he scored anyway?" He should have passed the ball to get his teammates involved with the game and to get his teammates confidence up. A good point guard relies on his teammates to carry a heavy scoring load, but Monta does not rely on his teammates, he relies on himself.

I think if Monta would distribute the ball more while BD is out of the line-up we would play more fluently. J-Rich and Harrington had bad games against the Lakers, but if Monta passed them the ball when they were open then maybe, and I'm saying maybe, J-Rich or Harrington might have gotten into a flow offensively. I saw a couple wide open looks for J-Rich and Harrington in that game, but Monta took it in himself for a harder shot. He either got fouled or made the shot most of the time, but by distributing the ball to your teammates when their open shows that you have confidence in your team and it gets your teammate going. It didn't really seem like Monta had confidence in anyone that game. Having trust in your teammates is big for a point guard!

One of many Warrior problems is ball distribution. When the Warriors play well they move the ball well and play as a team. When the Warriors struggle they start playing the isolation game, which we can't do! Only Biedrins can possibly isolate well. Monta scored 22 points against the Lakers, but it didn't do sh-t! If he passed the ball more and got about 16 points and 8 assists that game maybe someone else on the team would have played better because they got more looks. Monta could have easily gotten at least four more assists that game because there were players cutting to the hoop or were wide open for a shot and Monta did not pass the ball to them. The key to winning a game is getting your scorers enough touches, which BD does well, but Monta on the other hand does not do well.

You're right, you are going to catch **** for this post and I'll be first.

1. Are you really frickin telling me that Harrington and Jackson aren't getting enough shots? They both take more than their fair share of shots, they just don't make most of them.

2.Also, when JRich, Jackson, Harrington and Pietrus just stand around the perimeter Monta should take the ball to the rack, he's the only one that seems capable at this point. Also, he does pass up the shot when he's driving if there is an open Warrior closer to the basket.

3. When Coach took Monta out last night, the Lakers went up 20 on us, how is that Monta's fault? Not one Damn Warrior could score a basket with him out. Explain that?

4. As with any point guard you only get the assist when your teammate makes the shot. As a team we shot less than 40%. If we had made our shots, he would have registered more assists. When our power forward can't even make layups, how is Monta supposed to help him? He can't get any closer to the basket than that!

I never said that people on the team weren't getting enough shots. I never said that Monta should not drive to the hoop when everyone's standing around. I never said it was Monta's fault we lost to the Lakers. Where did you get that from? I depicted Monta as a point guard. I just stated that Monta needs to pass more than he does and that he is not a point player... I thought my post was very clear. I guess you didn't understand.

Josh, Monta was the only competent player on the court against the lakers. He is looking more and more like a PG every day (like Iverson, Arenas, etc). Give him time, the PG position takes a while to learn

I hope to God you're wrong about that Iverson, Arenas comparison... shoot-first, shoot-second, pass-3rd-only-to-beef-up-assist-stats PG's never take their teams anywhere. I can't name ONE, single time in recent memory when a PG like that won the NBA finals.

I seriously hopes Baron tutors him to be more like himself, than an Iverson or Arenas. Baron's a better pure playmaker than either of those guys.

Josh Jamison wrote: J-Rich and Harrington had bad games against the Lakers, but if Monta passed them the ball when they were open then maybe, and I'm saying maybe, J-Rich or Harrington might have gotten into a flow offensively.

The key to winning a game is getting your scorers enough touches, which BD does well, but Monta on the other hand does not do well.

You said it right here. Monta gave Al, Jrich and Jackson plenty of touches, they just didn't hit their shots. If the had been able to shoot straight, those assists would have gone to Monta. And don't try to tell me that the only time that Monta gave them the ball was when they were blanketed, that's crap.

Josh Jamison wrote:When the Warriors play well they move the ball well and play as a team. When the Warriors struggle they start playing the isolation game, which we can't do!

Let me correct you...

We struggle when our outside shots don't fall...When we play well is when our outside shots fall...no more simple or complicated then that...

it has very little to do with moving the ball well or playing as a team.

Let me correct you... I think you're wrong... I think it's more than that... Good ball movement = open shots. When a Warrior is trying to create his own jumper it does not work (and by jumpers I mean jump shots not driving into the lane). When another Warrrior creates a jumper for another Warrior through an assist it works better. We don't have any Kobes or T-Macs or Dirks on this team that can just hit jumpers in defenders faces, so ball movement is key to good offense for us. We play better when the ball is moving well.

Josh Jamison wrote:When the Warriors play well they move the ball well and play as a team. When the Warriors struggle they start playing the isolation game, which we can't do!

Let me correct you...

We struggle when our outside shots don't fall...When we play well is when our outside shots fall...no more simple or complicated then that...

it has very little to do with moving the ball well or playing as a team.

Let me correct you... I think you're wrong... I think it's more than that... Good ball movement = open shots. When a Warrior is trying to create his own jumper it does not work (and by jumpers I mean jump shots not driving into the lane). When another Warrrior creates a jumper for another Warrior through an assist it works better. We don't have any Kobes or T-Macs or Dirks on this team that can just hit jumpers in defenders faces, so ball movement is key to good offense for us. We play better when the ball is moving well.

I would say that practically all of the 17 three point shots we missed were wide open.

32 wrote:I hope to God you're wrong about that Iverson, Arenas comparison... shoot-first, shoot-second, pass-3rd-only-to-beef-up-assist-stats PG's never take their teams anywhere. I can't name ONE, single time in recent memory when a PG like that won the NBA finals.

I seriously hopes Baron tutors him to be more like himself, than an Iverson or Arenas. Baron's a better pure playmaker than either of those guys.

actually, Wade was completely a shoot first guard, and certainly was as much of a PG on the Heat as Arenas and Iverson were, and he got the ring. And Iverson took a woefully overmatched team to the finals in 2001...

To Live is A Value Judgment - Albert Camus
3 reasons for living: Jazz, Hoops and women

32 wrote:I hope to God you're wrong about that Iverson, Arenas comparison... shoot-first, shoot-second, pass-3rd-only-to-beef-up-assist-stats PG's never take their teams anywhere. I can't name ONE, single time in recent memory when a PG like that won the NBA finals.

I seriously hopes Baron tutors him to be more like himself, than an Iverson or Arenas. Baron's a better pure playmaker than either of those guys.

Agreed. I hope when Kidd retires that he'll come and tutor Monta. If not in time, then have Baron do it. Monta is the future phenom in the making. He was drafted as a point guard and hoped to become one. I love the mid-range jumper because it's so automatic, but I wanna see him dish out the dimes more.

I too, have to disagree with you Josh. Monta looks like the only real superstar-in-the-making on this team. I don't Monta to turn into John Stockton. He is quickly turning into one of the most unstoppable players off the dribble in the league. Hw has the ability to be better than Tony Parker. Monta is one of the greatest finishers around the rim in the league. Lately he has missed a few lay-ups but that is aberation than the norm.

Why do you want Monta to stop waht he does best? His pull-up stop and pop is fantastic. Asking monta to be a set-up man is like asking Beyonce to be a school marm. Monta could be the next Isiah Thomas, Gilbert Arenas, or Allen iverson. By the way, what's wrong with being similar to a scoring leader and MVP?

I think you should re-think what you are saying Josh. Monta is not the reason why the Warriors are losing. All praise to Monta.

Josh Jamison wrote:When another Warrrior creates a jumper for another Warrior through an assist it works better. We don't have any Kobes or T-Macs or Dirks on this team that can just hit jumpers in defenders faces, so ball movement is key to good offense for us. We play better when the ball is moving well.

i hear this all the time, "we play better when the ball is moving..."

first off, how does a team get shots off dribble or zone penetration? a deft ball handler like BD or a low-post player that demands a double team...with BD out, we have none of the aforementioned type of players...

we can run our share of pick n rolls with ellis and jackson that'll create some opportunities to penetrate and put pressure on the D...but you can't run that the entire game.

so that leaves running isolation plays, for jackson, occassionally harrington, and biendrins...

since these dudes aren't money players, they're not going to put that pressure on the D with their natural abilities as often as Dirk or Kobe or T-Mac...

Josh Jamison wrote:When the Warriors play well they move the ball well and play as a team. When the Warriors struggle they start playing the isolation game, which we can't do!

Let me correct you...

We struggle when our outside shots don't fall...When we play well is when our outside shots fall...no more simple or complicated then that...

it has very little to do with moving the ball well or playing as a team.

Let me correct you... I think you're wrong... I think it's more than that... Good ball movement = open shots. When a Warrior is trying to create his own jumper it does not work (and by jumpers I mean jump shots not driving into the lane). When another Warrrior creates a jumper for another Warrior through an assist it works better. We don't have any Kobes or T-Macs or Dirks on this team that can just hit jumpers in defenders faces, so ball movement is key to good offense for us. We play better when the ball is moving well.

I would say that practically all of the 17 three point shots we missed were wide open.

seriously dude...

so you figure we make 3 or 4 more 3-pointers...not asking too much percentage wise...

those 9 to 12 additional points can make a world of difference in the outcome of the game...

factor in how many fast break points the lakers may have gotten off of a long rebound...